On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 12:16 PM, Bill Spitzak <spit...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 07/29/2014 11:40 AM, Manuel Bachmann wrote: > > When creating a xdg_surface, the surface will not be mapped (i.e. shown) >> by desktop-shell anymore. It will only be if xdg_surface_present() has >> been called once. >> > > There seems to be a design goal in Wayland to prevent clients from making > surfaces that they never map. So it would be better if creation + commit of > a surface did the same thing as present. Also this does not break existing > clients. > That's the way it has worked in the past. There's nothing requiring this behavior in xdg_shell as we haven't stabilized it fully yet. Really, it doesn't matter whether the client has to call an additional request beyond just creating the xdg_surface. Another question for Manuel: Does present() interact with the surface commit? Should it? > > There is nothing special about the first time the surface wants attention > (other than historical legacy). The desktop should be allowed to turn this > into a notification just like it would on subsequent calls. > > True. We shouldn't claim to guarantee any "window showing up behavior" on the first or subsequent calls. > > If called twice, or more, the request will send an event to >> desktop-shell, so it can display a notification. >> > > This is not controlled by a count, but by whether a window is already > visible or already in the notification state. Clients should be able to > send a lot of these in a row. They cannot reliably test if they are > invisible and send the request only then, as there is a race condition. > > Yes, talking about it in terms of a count is a bad plan. > I also think the term "present" is not a great idea. This should be > exactly the same as "raise" or "show" or "activate" or any number of other > terms, but I have never seen the word "present" used before. I would reuse > an existing term. One reason is to prevent somebody else from adding a > redundant api for that term, because they did not realize "present" is the > thing they are looking for. > We also discussed the name "attention". The reason why we didn't go with "raise" or "show" is that it implies a specific action on the part of the compositor, namely showing the user the window. The term "activate" is used for something else in xdg_shell so that one's out too. --Jason Ekstrand
_______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel